JNUSU polls: Counting starts after 12 hours of disruption
New Delhi, Sep 15 : The counting for Jawaharlal Nehru University Students' Union (JNUSU) polls started on Saturday evening after more than 12 hours of interruption, caused by some people belonging to a political group contending for the top posts who had barged into the counting centre.
The Election Committee (EC) assigned the task of conducting polls said the counting resumed after the Grievance Redressal Committee appointed an observer -- who happens to be a JNU Professor -- to be present during the counting.
Earlier, the counting was stopped at around 4 a.m on Saturday when some Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) activists insisted on entering the counting centre and a demanded a recounting of votes, accusing the EC of colluding with the Left groups and keeping them deliberately out.
The EC in its turn said that announcements were made for the candidates' agents to join the counting at the centre as per rules, but they cannot join the process once the ballot box seals are broken.
The polling for the annual union elections was held on Friday in which nearly 70 per cent students exercised their franchise to elect their President, Vice President, General Secretary and Joint Secretary.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
‘Pay worker before sweat dries’: Madras HC invokes prophet’s teaching to settle lawyer’s dues
Madurai: Invoking the teachings of Prophet Muhammad to emphasise principles of fairness in labour jurisprudence, the Madras High Court has directed the Madurai City Municipal Corporation to settle the unpaid legal fees of a former standing counsel. Justice G.R. Swaminathan, in an order passed on Saturday, referred to the prophetic principle, “pay the worker before his sweat dries”, observing that this tenet is a facet of fairness eminently applicable to service and labour law.
The court was hearing a plea filed by P. Thirumalai, who served as the standing counsel for the Madurai City Municipal Corporation for over 14 years, from 1992 to 2006. Thirumalai contended that the civic body had failed to pay outstanding dues amounting to Rs 13.05 lakh for his representation in approximately 818 cases before the Madurai District Courts. The current petition was filed after the Corporation rejected a substantial part of his claim following a previous court direction to consider his representation.
Addressing the practical difficulties faced by the petitioner, who stated he could not afford to engage a clerk to obtain certified copies of the 818 judgments to substantiate his work, Justice Swaminathan devised a pragmatic solution. The court permitted the former counsel to approach the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) with a list of cases. The DLSA has been directed to procure the certified copies within two months, with the costs to be borne by the corporation and later deducted from the petitioner’s final settlement.
While the court acknowledged the Corporation's stance that fee bills must be in order, it ordered the civic body to settle the dues within two months of receiving the records from the DLSA.
However, citing the petitioner’s 18-year delay in challenging the non-payment, the court ruled that the settlement would be made without interest.
Beyond the specific relief granted to the petitioner, the single-judge bench made strong observations regarding the administration of legal fees and public funds. Justice Swaminathan termed the petitioner’s claim a "pittance" compared to the number of his appearances and expressed concern over the disparity in payments within the legal field. He noted that while "scandalously high amounts" are often paid to certain senior counsels and law officers by government and quasi-government bodies, others struggle to receive basic dues. The court observed that good governance requires public funds to be drawn on a measured basis and not distributed capriciously to a favoured few.
The Judge also flagged the "embarrassment" caused by the high number of Additional Advocate Generals (AAGs) in the state, noting that the appointment of nearly a dozen officers leads to work being allotted unnecessarily. He criticized the frequent practice of government counsel seeking adjournments on the pretext that an engaged AAG is appearing elsewhere. Justice Swaminathan expressed hope that such practices would cease in the Madurai Bench and that the Additional Advocate Generals would "turn a new leaf" from 2026.
